Search results

The corporate social responsibility (CSR) is an essential topic of both life and sociocybernetics. It requires businesspersons and other decision makers to be broad and hence to apply inter‐disciplinarity incorporating many, mutually partly different and therefore interdependent, viewpoints for requisite holism. To do so, they should use systems thinking. But the modern diversity of systems theories, including cybernetics, opens the issue: which systems theory and/or cybernetic should one use? Aims to discuss the dialectical systems theory (DST), its definition of holism and its definition of the seven principal groups of notions making systems thinking possible, when applied in a synergy. This may lead to a requisite holism, and hence to efficiency and effectiveness of the work on and of the CSR; it has often been done so in the 30 years of DST.

Desk research and indirect field research were used. The concept of CSR is a rather soft topic. It demands a holistic treatment and hence a plural theoretical foundation following recent trends in economics (business and environmental), management as well as systems thinking. The problem was investigated empirically from the systems‐oriented perspective supported by DST, because it tackles human personality and impacts over it and by it, rather than offers tools for people to use for whatever purposes.

The CSR concept belongs in sociocyberbetics linking cybernetics, systems theory and social aspects of the reality. The definition of CSR requires humans to think, decide, and act on a very broad basis rather than to reduce their horizons to the narrow habit of businesses to find profit only essential. CSR links the hard‐systemic and soft‐systemic versions of modern systems theories. It could be seen as an attribute of human personality and as a process between humans and organisations.

As CSR has many dimensions (economic, environmental and social ones, at least), the research focused on the requisitely holistic performance of an organisation being aware of diversified needs of multi‐stakeholders (including its own employees, as well).

The research findings and conclusions can support endeavors to implement the CSR concept in practice: in organisations, among different stakeholders and broader public audience (including governmental institutions and communities).

The paper provides the theoretical foundation to raise and improve socially responsible activities by supporting a maturing management philosophy approaching the viable, balanced organisation.

To show that systems theory (ST) has surfaced as innovation of worldview and thinking, aimed at holism. After ST's subordination to narrow specialists using it inside traditional disciplines, if at all, humankind needs a new innovation of ST. An option is offered.

Mulej's Dialectical ST is applied as worldview and methodology of requisite holism using Mulej's Dialectical System concept.

Mulej's Dialectical System concept applies to synergies of several STs, not only viewpoints. Here, six soft STs and the social responsibility (SR) concept are combined around human subjective starting points aimed at holism and innovation, including ethics of interdependence. Combination offers new insights.

Research is limited to soft STs and implies knowledge of more STs and SR as well as participants' readiness for creative interdisciplinary co‐operation.

The new concept offers a new step toward increased innovation capacity, especially toward innovation of culture toward requisite holism and innovation. This is a crucial precondition for survival in the modern global society and economy.

The authors know neither books nor articles presenting synergies of several STs and SR nor their application to preconditions of innovation.

Ludwig von Bertalanffy created general systems theory in an effort to counter the oversight and endangerment of humankind by disciplinary specialization. Bertalanffy desired for a holistic worldview and openness to replace overspecialization. Although widely cited and regarded, his concept prevailed only at a fictitious level, mostly as a tool inside specialization, which many scholars are neither able to overcome nor complement with interdisciplinary, creative co‐operation. Similarities (isomorphisms) are not enough. Here, a system of seven groups of systems thinking principles, which serve as a framework for restoring Bertalanffian systems thinking without his exaggerations is presented.